Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: marc.s on July 14, 2006, 10:09:05 am
-
This has me a little confuzzled..
I always work in adobe rgb in Photoshop and save my files as such. But when I save jpegs for showing others I convert to srgb to avoid the image looking flat. That has worked for me in the past from what I remember, but now I get crazy opposite results. Instead, these images get a contrast and saturation boost when I save them as srgb - as soon as I load them back into Photoshop or any other app they show as over-saturated.
However, if I 'save for web' they look like they're supposed to.
Another thing that I don't understand is that when I convert to srgb I get a little star * next to the file name and bit depth in the window, but when I import those srgb images the star isn't there any longer.. I seem to remember that it used to be, but maybe I was wrong?
In the process of saving jpegs I also reduce to 8 bits, but I don't think that's causing any issues. I use CS2
I have a feeling it's due to my changing of monitor profile, but I thought all pictures were displayed properly in Photoshop using the monitor profile?
What do I need to do to have pictures display properly as jpegs? And what is going on here?
-
Post a screenshot of your Photoshop color management settings--something is set wrong there.
-
Hope this works..
(http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/577/colorsettings9vp.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
-
the star in the title means the file has bean changed.
regarding your color problem:
in the Color Management Policies:
set RGB: to "perserve embedded profile"
this should fix the problem. also, consider checking all those "ask when opening" and "ask when pasting" check boxes so you'll always be in control of CMP.
sRGB is much smaller than ARGB. assigning ARGB into an sRGB image makes it overly saturated.
PS: change the Intent setting to Perceptual too, although it doesn't really matter at the moment - the engine will use RelCol for matrix profiles anyway but who knows, it might work in a near future
-
Hmm.. so all this time when I've saved for web they've still been in adobe rgb.. what a mess. It's even worse that they won't convert to look roughly the same; when I send the files to other people it doesn't help that they're set to preserve embedded profiles if they view them in their web browsers, right?
So how do I make sure they look correct on other people's web browsers?
the star in the title means the file has bean changed.
regarding your color problem:
in the Color Management Policies:
set RGB: to "perserve embedded profile"
this should fix the problem. also, consider checking all those "ask when opening" and "ask when pasting" check boxes so you'll always be in control of CMP.
sRGB is much smaller than ARGB. assigning ARGB into an sRGB image makes it overly saturated.
PS: change the Intent setting to Perceptual too, although it doesn't really matter at the moment - the engine will use RelCol for matrix profiles anyway but who knows, it might work in a near future
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70743\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Hmm.. so all this time when I've saved for web they've still been in adobe rgb.. what a mess. It's even worse that they won't convert to look roughly the same; when I send the files to other people it doesn't help that they're set to preserve embedded profiles if they view them in their web browsers, right?
So how do I make sure they look correct on other people's web browsers?
You can't, really, since most browsers are not properly color managed. The best you can do is to convert to sRGB and hope. Having RGB color management off is what was causing your problem. I second the recommendation to check all 3 of the boxes in the color management section, bit I'd leave Relative Colorimetric set as-is. RelCol can clip colors when converting to a smaller color space, but you can deal with that by soft-proofing and selective desaturation before converting color spaces. Perceptual is less likely to clip colors, but it is much more likely to cause a color cast that is more annoying to get rid of.
-
So when I want to upload to my website or similar I have to:
1) Save as srgb
2) Close and reopen without colour managing (so that it shows up as over-saturated)
3) Desaturate to taste
Is that correct? It seems incredibly clumsy that it can't just convert it to something that's reasonably close in srgb..
I'm also confused because I remember people noting that viewing adobe rgb files in web browsers they will appear less saturated and contrasty. I suppose this makes sense if the colour space hasn't been 'compressed' into the smaller space, but I don't understand why the opposite happens when it is (since the colours aren't more saturated, they're just allowed more space)..
Thank you for your help, I guess I might have to redo all my webgalleries.
You can't, really, since most browsers are not properly color managed. The best you can do is to convert to sRGB and hope. Having RGB color management off is what was causing your problem. I second the recommendation to check all 3 of the boxes in the color management section, bit I'd leave Relative Colorimetric set as-is. RelCol can clip colors when converting to a smaller color space, but you can deal with that by soft-proofing and selective desaturation before converting color spaces. Perceptual is less likely to clip colors, but it is much more likely to cause a color cast that is more annoying to get rid of.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Edit/Convert to profile...
then choose sRGB as destinaiton profile, you'll be all right.
-
RelCol can clip colors when converting to a smaller color space, but you can deal with that by soft-proofing and selective desaturation before converting color spaces.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70761\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jonathan, what do you mean by "selective desaturation"? turn onf soft-proofing and selectively desaturate the OOG areas? how do you do it?
-
Edit/Convert to profile...
then choose sRGB as destinaiton profile, you'll be all right.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70779\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
But that's what I've done until now and that just leaves the srgb jpegs overly saturated..
-
Jonathan, what do you mean by "selective desaturation"? turn onf soft-proofing and selectively desaturate the OOG areas? how do you do it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70780\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
He's probably referring to only desaturating certain colours.. you can select which colour you want in several ways, for instance in hue/saturation, and then finetune the range and the gradient with the bars at the bottom..
-
marc you are still confused. no offense but i suggest you grab some book & do some homework.
either of these 3 will do:
Abhay Sharma's 'Understanding Color Management'
digital dog Andrew Rodney's 'Color Management'
Bruce Fraser's 'Real World Color Management'
-
Since you've turned off the RGB colormanagement policies (have no idea why you do that) PS is going to handle your file the same way as if it were untagged.
I'd recomend to turn it on and click all alternatives for Profile miss matchines so you'll get a dialog box asking you what to do everytime you've got a profile miss match.
To get the correct colors in "your" workflow you need to go to (after you've opened the file) EDIT->Assign Profile-> chose sRGB in this case since it's the colorspace you saved your image in.
If you haven't chosen to turn off RGB colormanagement policies you could just have chosen to use the embedded profile (insted of the working space) in the dialog box when opening the file and the colors would be correct.
EDIT: After more careful reading I see that Phuong have more or less already said the same as I've have done.
-
I think you're both missing the point..
I don't care about photoshop, when I save as jpeg it's not to view in photoshop, it's for other people to view my pictures on the web, etc.
As was mentioned earlier, web browsers and various image viewers may or may not ignore any profiles that have been assigned to the images. So one person will see it the way it's supposed to be seen and another will see it way too saturated.
That's why I said that I need it to look completely proper in srgb in a program that doesn't know anything about colour profiles. And apparently the only way to make it look right is the clumsy method I described earlier?
-
So when I want to upload to my website or similar I have to:
1) Save as srgb
2) Close and reopen without colour managing (so that it shows up as over-saturated)
3) Desaturate to taste
No. There is never any reason to turn off color management. And you need to desaturate (if necessary) BEFORE converting to sRGB, or out-of-gamut colors will be clipped during conversion and there will be no point in editing the converted file.
If necessary, desaturate first, soft-proofing to sRGB to check for color clipping, then convert to sRGB and save a new copy of the file.
-
Jonathan, what do you mean by "selective desaturation"? turn onf soft-proofing and selectively desaturate the OOG areas? how do you do it?
I use the Hue/Saturation adjustment dialog, which allows you to individually adjust red, blue, green, yellow, cyan, and magenta. You can increase magenta saturation and simultaneously decrease green saturation, etc. If you want to get really advanced, create a saturation mask to reduce the amount of change to less-saturated areas.
-
But that's what I've done until now and that just leaves the srgb jpegs overly saturated..
Only because your PS color magement settings are all f***ed up, and sRGB images are being displayed as if they are Adobe RGB, which makes them look overly-saturated in PS. Fix your color management seddings as instructed earlier, and this problem will go away.
-
Only because your PS color magement settings are all f***ed up, and sRGB images are being displayed as if they are Adobe RGB, which makes them look overly-saturated in PS. Fix your color management seddings as instructed earlier, and this problem will go away.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I did fix the settings, but it doesn't change anything. Once again, it's not in photoshop the srgb jpegs need to look good, it's in web browsers and similar programs.
When I softproof to srgb nothing changes, probably because my monitor can only display the srgb gamut. So it doesn't help anything to softproof. The only thing that works that I've tried is what I described before. I don't understand why there isn't a way to convert images into a smaller colour space and have them look roughly the same within that space without having to manually edit.
-
The web by and large isn't color managed. Few web browsers use the display profile and an embedded profile (or the assumption the file is in sRGB) to properly preview the numbers. Most users don't calibrate and profile their displays. So the same numbers will preview differently.
The preview in Photoshop IS correct. That it doesn't look this way elsewhere doesn't change this fact.
When you soft proof in Photoshop and ask for Monitor RGB, you're seeing how that image would appear in YOUR web browser (which doesn't understand sRGB) since Photoshop is using your display profile to make the preview. But that doesn't mean anyone else will see this. Move the file to any other display, even with a good profile and it will likely appear differently than what you saw.
-
Only because your PS color magement settings are all f***ed up, and sRGB images are being displayed as if they are Adobe RGB, which makes them look overly-saturated in PS. Fix your color management seddings as instructed earlier, and this problem will go away.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
this is exactly what i wanted to say in the fisrt place, and why i suggested checking the three check boxes. by turning RGB policy off and turning the check boxes off, you are telling PS "Photoshop, you are now in charge of my RGB images. do whatever you wish."
of course, PS dont deny this 'favor'. so whatever images you give it, it says "image, you dont talk in whatever your profile is anymore. you are now talking in aRGB"
the result? well, sRGB images turn overly saturated, and prophotoRGB images (if you have any) turn overly desaturated.
PS: by the way thanks Jonathan for the selective desaturation tip!
-
Without the warning check boxes, the Policies can be real dangerous as seen in the screen dump here. With warning check boxes ON, the policies really don't do anything but alter the defaults you'll get when a warning dialog is popped. That's good because its a safety net. Unless you have some need to automate embedding a certain profile on all incoming files, the warnings should be on OR at least set the policy set to Preserve. Of the worst possible policies and off warning check box combo's you could make is OFF and no warnings, see here. Photoshop is being told to strip profiles from any document not in Adobe RGB (1998) and to assume all untagged documents are Adobe RGB (1998) which of course isn't the case for images going to the web (or non color managed applications, god forbid).
-
I read through here as much as I could concentrate on, but didn't anyone pick up on marc's original post the fact he changed his monitor profile on top of everything else?
That seems to create more of a "Which came first the chicken or the egg?" situation in terms of color origination.
What space during capture and edits did he perform while using the first monitor profile and was that profile correct to begin with since the second system profile gave a marked change to his previews that were OK before.
Maybe a start from scratch by establishing which monitor profile is the correct one would be the first thing to do along with the correct CM Color Settings in PS.
I'm now totally confused from this thread as to which way to go, myself.
-
I read through here as much as I could concentrate on, but didn't anyone pick up on marc's original post the fact he changed his monitor profile on top of everything else?
That seems to create more of a "Which came first the chicken or the egg?" situation in terms of color origination.
What space during capture and edits did he perform while using the first monitor profile and was that profile correct to begin with since the second system profile gave a marked change to his previews that were OK before.
Maybe a start from scratch by establishing which monitor profile is the correct one would be the first thing to do along with the correct CM Color Settings in PS.
I'm now totally confused from this thread as to which way to go, myself.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70880\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
he's seeing different results from his same new monitor (images look fine on web browsers but ugly in PS). the point is, by turning RGB policies & warnings off, PS automatically STRIP OFF every image's profile if it's not aRGB (in his case) and ASSIGN (not convert) it with aRGB. hence the ugly result. and because now PS assumes aRGB is the correct profile, soft proofing shows almost no change because now the image is CONVERT (internally) to sRGB (and to his monitor profile) so the appearance now stays the same ("overly saturated") but the RGB values are changed.
in other words, with that same image, even though he sees it overly saturated in PS but if he saves it as it is (not convert to sRGB) and opens in web browser, it'll look normal.
digitaldog and Jonathan did addressed this btw.
-
Phuong,
Great, clear as mud.
My head's beginning to hurt.
-
I did fix the settings, but it doesn't change anything. Once again, it's not in photoshop the srgb jpegs need to look good, it's in web browsers and similar programs.
When I softproof to srgb nothing changes, probably because my monitor can only display the srgb gamut. So it doesn't help anything to softproof. The only thing that works that I've tried is what I described before. I don't understand why there isn't a way to convert images into a smaller colour space and have them look roughly the same within that space without having to manually edit.
OK, let me start over. Change your color management preferences to what is shown in your screenshot, then make the following changes in the Color Management Policies section:
Change all 3 dropdown list boxes (RGB, CMYK, and Gray) to Preserve Embedded Profiles.
Check Missing Profiles: Ask When Opening and Profile Mismatches: Ask When Pasting, but leave Profile Mismatches: Ask When Opening unchecked. This will force Photoshop to honor whatever profile is embedded in the image without asking you questions you aren't ready to answer correctly. After making these changes and restarting Photoshop, what you see in Photoshop is what your image really looks like, assuming your monitor is correctly profiled (which is something I cannot judge without seeing it firsthand).
When you're ready to make a web version of your image, desaturate colors if necessary, CONVERT (NOT assign) the image to sRGB, and execute a File | Save As from Photoshop's menu. If you convert, you may see over-saturated colors desaturate, but if all image colors fall within sRGB, the image won't change visibly--the only difference will be in the histogram if you set it to display all color channels. If saturation increases, you have assigned instead of converted, and deserve 40 lashes with Real World Color Management.
Once you have properly converted the image to sRGB, that's all you can do for web display. Every unprofiled/non-color-managed browser will display your image slightly differently, but sRGB is what they are all kinda/sorta trying to achieve, so it's your best average bet. Deviating from sRGB by editing for one particular unprofiled monitor will screw more people than it will benefit, and will make you look really clueless to people who look at your images with a profiled monitor.
-
Just out of curiosity, what led you to the Color Managment RGB settings to OFF? OFF isn't really off, it's a cruel joke by the Photoshop engineers (or marketing) that lead some people to "think" it's off. But color management is always on in Photoshop since version 7. The only question is to what degree does the user have any control.
Pretty much all your problems have come from working with your settings to OFF...choose whatever working space you want in Photoshop (sRGB, Adobe RGB or Pro Photo RGB) and when preparing images for the web, just run an action to convert to sRGB and then use Safe For Web-you even get to see a preview of what the image will look like in "un-managed color" in the SFW preview.
You made you life pretty miserable by trying to turn off color management...
-
You made you life pretty miserable by trying to turn off color management...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70959\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
A more accurate statement is that Adobe makes all our lives miserable with their color mismanagement implementation. But it does create career opportunities for hordes of "gurus" and "geniuses".
-
Ok, it's still not working, but I can't seem to explain it here without it being implied that I'm an idiot and without actually getting any further..
1) I've set all the settings as requested by Jonathan.
2) I'm working in adobe rgb and *convert* to srgb, saving the files as jpeg.
3) I then load that jpeg into a web browser (Mozilla) as well as ACDSee 5 and compare side to side with the file in Photoshop. The colours are too saturated anywhere but in Photoshop.
4) Just to clear things up on what's actually going on in Photoshop: If I load the jpeg I'm asked to either use the embedded profile, convert to document's colour space, or to ignore the profile. If I choose one of the two first options the file looks fine. If I choose the last it is too saturated. I assume this is how it's supposed to be.
So I'm still left with not being able to convert to jpeg and have the images show with normal saturation.
tlooknbill: I have no idea why I didn't have this problem before, it seems something has changed on my system and my original guess was that it was related to a new monitor profile, but that doesn't seem to be it..
Also for the record, my prints are fine (I send them to the lab as adobe rgb jpegs).
-
you should choose the first option: "use the embedded profile"
if you choose the last option "ignore the profile" it's essentially the same thing as turning the RGB policy off (the image's profile is stripped off, and aRGB is assigned to it. it the image's profile were pRGB i would turn out less saturated instead)
your monitor and its profile are fine. there's nothing wrong witht them.
-
3) I then load that jpeg into a web browser (Mozilla) as well as ACDSee 5 and compare side to side with the file in Photoshop. The colours are too saturated anywhere but in Photoshop.
Well that's because all Mozilla browsers don't supports colormanagement .
Safari is spot on regarding colors for me when I compare a file in PS and the same file on one of my web sites.
Firefox and Netscape are to saturated (as if I set a hue/saturation layer in PS to about +10-15 saturation )
About ACDSee 5 I have no idea what that is ... Is that a pc app??? (that would explain things since I'm on a mac )
EDIT: I did a search for ACDSee 5 and if there is some sort of colormanagement in that app you might want to look at your preferences there since they most likley are wrong (as your settings in PS was)
Patrick.
-
Well that's because all Mozilla browsers don't supports colormanagement .
Read again: He has converted the image to sRGB (step 2) - therefore it should be rendered fine with any CM ignoring softwares like browsers.
Marc,
Have you tried "Save for Web..."? The image should look exactly like it looks in Mozilla. Have turned on a soft proof?
-
Well that's because all Mozilla browsers don't supports colormanagement .
I know, but that's the whole point of this.. I want the image converted to srgb without having it look vastly differently in a non-colour managed app than it looks in adobe rgb in photoshop.
When I save in 'save for web' there is no problem. But when I 'save as' the pictures are always too saturated. I don't know what causes the difference.
The reason I can't always 'save for web' is that sometimes it says the files are too big and it recommends against it. I also would like to know what causes the difference.
-
Marc,
Have you tried "Save for Web..."? The image should look exactly like it looks in Mozilla. Have turned on a soft proof?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71464\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yep, save for web does indeed work, but I can't always save for web (I forget the warning, maybe it's an irrelevant one). Do you have any idea why it converts properly to srgb there withouth oversaturating?
I tried turning on and off softproofing, but see no difference whatsoever.. (I use it for my prints with a lab profile and it works fine with that).
-
Download the untagged PDI test image that's been converted to sRGB I've linked here and tell us if it looks oversaturated or correct looking in your nonCM browser.
Then drag it to your system, open in PS (don't convert) but assign sRGB, then assign your monitor profile and then AdobeRGB and see what previews you get. You should not see much of a change in saturation assigning your monitor or sRGB but a big change assigning AdobeRGB.
If the PDI target is correct looking assigning sRGB and viewed in your browser, but YOUR images look oversaturated converting to sRGB and viewed in your browser, then your images were either edited with a screwed up monitor profile or your digicam color space settings were botched or combination of both or you edited with Soft Proof on set to some other space or whatever.
Something is wacked and it's not the fault of color management because the majority of professionals and hobbyists like myself don't have this problem. And I've been researching this and implementing this technology for over 5 years and I've never had this problem on my 5 year old Mac OS 9.2.2 system and 8 year old calibrated CRT. And their are others with Windows system as well who don't have this problem.[attachment=835:attachment]
-
My feeling is that your problem is related to your monitor and its profile.
Instead of converting to sRGB, try converting to your monitor profile. If this produces a good looking jpeg in your web browser, then there's something wrong with your monitor / monitor profile.
Resist the temptation to henceforth convert to your monitor profile prior to saving as a jpeg. It might look good on your monitor, but it won't on look good on anyone else's.
Converting to sRGB is the way to go - even if it looks shit in a web browser on your monitor.
-
I know, but that's the whole point of this.. I want the image converted to srgb without having it look vastly differently in a non-colour managed app than it looks in adobe rgb in photoshop.
When I save in 'save for web' there is no problem. But when I 'save as' the pictures are always too saturated. I don't know what causes the difference.
The reason I can't always 'save for web' is that sometimes it says the files are too big and it recommends against it. I also would like to know what causes the difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71469\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
File size should not be the cause, but no one else seems to come up with an explanation.
After converting to 8-bit and srgb, what is the pixel/resolution size in Edit/Image Size? When converting from psd to jpg, I flatten the layers, delete the alpha channels, convert to 8-bit and srgb, resample to 100ppi and exact pixel dimensions in Image Size. Than and only then will I Save As jpg or SFW.
Not sure if this will fix your problem, but just a shot in the dark.
-
Then drag it to your system, open in PS (don't convert) but assign sRGB, then assign your monitor profile and then AdobeRGB and see what previews you get. You should not see much of a change in saturation assigning your monitor or sRGB but a big change assigning AdobeRGB.
Well.. I guess it's all wrong then. When I assign srgb it desaturates quite strongly. Assigning adobe rgb doesn't change the image at all, and assigning monitor profile changes it somewhat.
Also, when I save for web it only look proper if I don't convert to srgb first. That really has me confused. To explain the steps:
1) raw image opened in photoshop, adobe rgb.
2) image is 'saved for web'.
3) everything is fine
but:
1) same image converted to srgb and then
2) image 'save for web' shows the preview as being too saturated (and it is)
Is it possible that there's something messed up with the srgb profile on my system?
-
File size should not be the cause, but no one else seems to come up with an explanation.
After converting to 8-bit and srgb, what is the pixel/resolution size in Edit/Image Size? When converting from psd to jpg, I flatten the layers, delete the alpha channels, convert to 8-bit and srgb, resample to 100ppi and exact pixel dimensions in Image Size. Than and only then will I Save As jpg or SFW.
Not sure if this will fix your problem, but just a shot in the dark.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71524\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The whole file size thing is a bit of a mystery, the save for web function simly complains that the file is too large and memory errors may occur. It doesn't happen every time I save large files, so not sure what causes it.
I always flatten and convert to 8 bit before I save for web or regular 'save as', so the files are normal sizes, nothing crazy there..
-
Use "Save for Web" for monitor-sized images (1600x1200 or smaller) and it won't complain. But if you use it for full-res 1Ds images, it will complain and operate slowly.
-
Well.. I guess it's all wrong then. When I assign srgb it desaturates quite strongly. Assigning adobe rgb doesn't change the image at all, and assigning monitor profile changes it somewhat.
This seems reasonable enough.
Also, when I save for web it only look proper if I don't convert to srgb first. That really has me confused. To explain the steps:
1) raw image opened in photoshop, adobe rgb.
2) image is 'saved for web'.
3) everything is fine
but:
1) same image converted to srgb and then
2) image 'save for web' shows the preview as being too saturated (and it is)
Is it possible that there's something messed up with the srgb profile on my system?
That doesn't sound likely, but it may be possible.
Here are three versions of the same image. The image was first imported from a raw file with ACR as ProPhoto RGB in 16-bit, then converted to 8-bit and Adobe RGB (relative intent, black point compensation on). According to the proof preview, there were no noticeable differences between ProPhoto RGB in 16-bit and Adobe RGB in 8-bit for this image.
Version #1 was converted to sRGB with relative intent, black-point compensation on, then saved as JPEG. #2 was assigned the sRGB profile, then saved as JPEG with the same settings as for #1. Version #3 was converted with "Save for web", very high quality, and no colour profile.
(http://folk.uio.no/jani/hobbies/photo/tmp/EPV0175conv.jpg)(http://folk.uio.no/jani/hobbies/photo/tmp/EPV0175ass.jpg)(http://folk.uio.no/jani/hobbies/photo/tmp/EPV0175sfweb.jpg)
Here's a suggestion: why don't you take your original image as it is straight from the raw converter, resize it to e.g. 640x480, and save it as a PSD. Then you can let one of us have a look at it, and e.g. illustrate step-for-step what we're doing with exactly which settings.
-
When you assign sRGB to the image I posted it desaturates considerably?
Your monitor profile is screwed up or you've got a wide gamut working space profile Photoshop is referencing as your system display profile.
Check what happens to this same sRGB file when wide gamut working space is load on my system as seen in PS from the captured screenshot attachment. Check the GMB CC red patch in the original sRGB image and it reads 222 in the red channel. That's just 33 levels away from clipping yet you indicate it's desaturated.
[attachment=837:attachment]
-
Ok, I'm a little confused because tlooknbill and jani seem to say different things regarding the desaturation issue..
I just tried running someone else's monitor profile (he has the same monitor, and the profiles are very close) and it didn't make any difference. So I think my monitor profile is ok.
Not sure about what you mean by the wide gamut working space profile - I suggested earlier something is wrong with my srgb profile, but not sure if that's what you mean..?
Either way, since it works with save for web, I don't understand why it doesn't work with 'save as' - but at least I can save for web. I just can't convert to srgb before I save for web, then it gets too saturated (I have no idea why).
jani or anyone else, if you want me to send a file, just let me know..
-
Didn't mean to confuse. I'm only going by what you posted about what you saw when you opened the sRGB test image I first linked. You indicated assigning sRGB to that untagged sRGB image in PS desaturated it considerably. Are we correct on that?
If so, it means your monitor profile or whatever profile is loaded in your system that PS is using to adjust tagged previews is a profile that has a gamut wider than sRGB. I mimiced this on my system by taking a screen shot of the same test image and assigning sRGB to it in PS while loading in my system the wide gamut RGB working space instead of my custom EyeOne Display profile.
On my Mac I get a live preview update of tagged images in PS when changing my system profile. Loading the Wide Gamut RGB profile made the sRGB tagged image considerably desaturated duplicating what you described on your system. This suggests that you have the wrong system profile PS is referencing to adjust previews to tagged images.
If my sRGB test image is not desaturating when assigning sRGB to the image on your system in PS, then forget what I said.
-
Here's the thing Marc, I think you've got some things kinda messed up in your color management workflow and have a problem in that your previous color settings were, in a word, wrong...
Here's what I suggest you do...
Open the Photoshop Color Settings and confirm that you have the settings set to the following:
Click on the settings drop down and select "North American Prepress 2" (assuming Photoshop CS2)
That will give you an Photoshop working space RGB setting of Adobe RGB.
Under Color Management Policies make sure ALL of them are set to "Preserve Embeded Profiles".
Under the policies, keep all of the warnings on (at this point).
This will assume the following-that you wish to work in Adobe RGB as your Photoshop working space and that images that you wish to put on the web will want to be in sRGB.
At some point, you are going to have to do some figgering...in the past, you had your color settings set to No Color Management and that means that SOME of your files really are in Adobe RGB, and some really are in sRGB and you really are not sure which are which. But with the color settings now configured, you should be able to straighten out your problems.
If you open an image with your current new settings of Adobe RGB as your working space and Preserve Embedded Profiles and warnings to all your policies, opening an image should follow the following senario:
You open an image and it pops a warning about no embedded profile, continue opening the image and look at the file. If the image looks "right" you can assume the image is indeed in Adobe RGB-even if there is no profile embedded. Then go into the Edit "Assign Profile" and assign it Adobe RGB.
If you open an image with no profile and the image is over saturated, you've got an sRGB image. Go to Edit "Assign Profile" and assign it sRGB.
The only time you would see an image look de-saturated and dark is where you open an image with an sRGB working space and the image SHOULD be Adobe RGB.
As long as you preserve embedded profiles, and your images have profiles, your images should "look right" in Photoshop. The only time something will look "off" is when either the wrong profile has been assigned, or you've treated an image with no profile wrong.
If you work on an image in Adobe RGB, and the image looks "right", to put it up on the web, you'll want to CONVERT to sRGB and then ideally use Save for Web. Note, unless you specifically select the ICC Profile option in Save for Web, the profile will be stripped out. That's ok since saving out for the web is really only used as a single destination file and not a working file, so go ahead and strip out the profile. In the future, you'll be able to tell when you re-open an image from Save for Web since only those files will ever have no profile emdedded.
If you are working on an image with your Photoshop set to Adobe RGB, an image saved in Adobe RGB or an image CONVERTED to sRGB will look the same on your monitor-if and only if you have your color settings set to Preserve Embedded Profiles. You can work on sRGB and Adobe RGB files at the same time and Photoshop will correct for the differences. Note that copy/paste between images will pop a dialog about a profile mismatch, always "Preserve Appearance" not the numbers.
The ONLY time you should ever see any differences is where the profile in the image has been stripped and you've assigned the wrong profile to the image.
-
Didn't mean to confuse. I'm only going by what you posted about what you saw when you opened the sRGB test image I first linked. You indicated assigning sRGB to that untagged sRGB image in PS desaturated it considerably. Are we correct on that?
Well. I have the warning of 'missing profile - ask when opening' set to OFF. Then I open the image (without getting a warning) and it looks fine. Then I select 'assign profile' and pick srgb. Already in the preview the image is strongly desaturated.
If I set the 'warning of missing profile - ask when opening' to ON I'm asked if I want to assing profile srgb and then convert document to working rgb. If I do that it shows up a little bit desaturated compared to the image in Internet Explorer. Now, if I then select 'assign profile' - srgb again it desaturates strongly.
If so, it means your monitor profile or whatever profile is loaded in your system that PS is using to adjust tagged previews is a profile that has a gamut wider than sRGB. I mimiced this on my system by taking a screen shot of the same test image and assigning sRGB to it in PS while loading in my system the wide gamut RGB working space instead of my custom EyeOne Display profile.
Well, it shouldn't.. I use a NEC 2090 and profiled it with an Optix XR..
-
Schewe, I followed your instructions step by step, and still have the same problems I'm afraid.
Btw, all my psd files are saved properly as Adobe RGB I'm pretty sure (I did a few random checks again just now). I'm always working in Adobe RGB with them, and I always just save them as such (and it always has 'adobe rgb' ticked in the profile box).
Thanks everyone who's been helping out (I'm still waiting to hear from jani whom I sent some example files). I really don't know why it's weird the way it is, but at least I have a way of making it work for web (I make sure NOT to convert to srgb, then I use 'save for web' and that works..)
-
Well. I have the warning of 'missing profile - ask when opening' set to OFF. Then I open the image (without getting a warning) and it looks fine. Then I select 'assign profile' and pick srgb. Already in the preview the image is strongly desaturated.
If I set the 'warning of missing profile - ask when opening' to ON I'm asked if I want to assing profile srgb and then convert document to working rgb. If I do that it shows up a little bit desaturated compared to the image in Internet Explorer. Now, if I then select 'assign profile' - srgb again it desaturates strongly.
Then if your working space is Adobe RGB, the file that looks DESATURATED is already IN Adobe RGB...Assign is not the same as Convert. It's not clear at all how you've gone about working with profiles since for a period of time, you were working with your Color Settings in Photoshop set to OFF-which in any senario is simply wrong.
Ignore for the moment, how the image looks in Explorer. At this point you need to figure out what's wrong with your Photoshop settings and how you are using (or not using) profiles...
-
Are fresh images giving you the same grief as existing images?
-
Well. I have the warning of 'missing profile - ask when opening' set to OFF. Then I open the image (without getting a warning) and it looks fine. Then I select 'assign profile' and pick srgb. Already in the preview the image is strongly desaturated.
This behavior is normal. With the color management settings you specified, when you open an RGB image with no profile, Photoshop assumes Adobe RGB and assigns Adobe RGB to the image. With a web graphic created in sRGB this will result in a stongly oversaturated image when you view it in Photoshop. The main problem is that you are saving your images without an attached profile, which makes them RGB "mystery meat" requiring the computer to guess the original profile. Computers suck at guessing, hence your problem. Turn the "missing profile" warning back on, and manually assign sRGB (NOT Adobe RGB) when opening untagged web graphics. And get in the habit of including a profile in every image you save, so that Photoshop knows what it's dealing with when opening a file.
If I set the 'warning of missing profile - ask when opening' to ON I'm asked if I want to assing profile srgb and then convert document to working rgb. If I do that it shows up a little bit desaturated compared to the image in Internet Explorer. Now, if I then select 'assign profile' - srgb again it desaturates strongly.
Well, it shouldn't.. I use a NEC 2090 and profiled it with an Optix XR..
This is also normal behavior. Unless your monitor's color profile perfectly matches sRGB (which ain't never gonna happen), there is always going to be some minor differences between what you see in Photoshop (a color managed application) and any non-color-managed app. Profiling your monitor does not make non-color-managed apps display images with correct colors; a profile is nothing more than a mathematical description of your moniotor's color performance. Color managed apps like Photoshop use the profile to send the correct RGB numbers to the monitor for a given color, Explorer doesn't. It sends the image's RGB numbers directly to the monitor.
When you open your untagged image file and assign sRGB, that is correct. But then you pointlessly convert to Adobe RGB, which alters the RGB color numbers in the image and tags the image with the Adobe RGB profile. The image looks the same, but now you have changed all of the RGB numbers inside of it. So when you assign sRGB after doing this, you now have an image with Adobe RGB color numbers, but you are incorrectly interpreting those numbers as sRGB. This will always result in an oversaturated image.
-
Jonathan, I'm a little confused, and not sure I made myself clear. But when I open the index file that was attached in this thread, the only way to make it look properly saturated is to choose option one when I open it and get the missing profile warning - 'don't colour manage' or option two - 'Assign working RGB - Adobe RGB'. If I pick 'assign profile sRGB' it opens as flat and desaturated whether I tick 'and then convert to working RGB' or not. So the third option is no good. Since it's an sRGB image I thought it should be opened as sRGB?
edit - properly saturated relatively to what it looks like in internet explorer and similar programs given that I don't know what the index file is supposed to look like.
-
Then if your working space is Adobe RGB, the file that looks DESATURATED is already IN Adobe RGB...Assign is not the same as Convert. It's not clear at all how you've gone about working with profiles since for a period of time, you were working with your Color Settings in Photoshop set to OFF-which in any senario is simply wrong.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71777\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not sure which part of my post you were responding to.. I'm aware that converting and assigning are two different things, I was just noting that when I work with images I always open the Raw files into Photoshop from ACR as Adobe RGB, and the colour space in Photoshop is already set to Adobe RGB. Then when I save them as psd nothing is changed as far as I know. So I'm not sure why there should be a problem with those files..
Dark Penguin - yeah, I'm having the same issue with all images. I'm pretty confused about it all because I see what I see on my monitor and prints, but I'm apparently not able to convey it accurately here. I'm also undoubtedly missing some points in the posts that are attempting to help me.
FWIW Jani looked at my samples and he found the opposite of me - that my regular conversion works fine (into sRGB), but that 'save for web' conversion doesn't work. And I find the exact opposite!
-
FWIW Jani looked at my samples and he found the opposite of me - that my regular conversion works fine (into sRGB), but that 'save for web' conversion doesn't work. And I find the exact opposite!
To be specific, what I wrote was that "save for web" without conversion first will leave the file looking desaturated, since it's still essentially in Adobe RGB, but is interpreted as something closer to sRGB. "Save for web" with conversion first seems to render similar colours in e.g. Firefox as to that displayed for the original in Photoshop.
Before responding to your reply to me, I guess I should've read up on what was written here, because I think Jonathan Wienke's last response explains what happens.
My responses are based on what I see on my monitor, and perhaps the "normally saturated" original image that I see is over-saturated according to what you think it should be.
-
I was just noting that when I work with images I always open the Raw files into Photoshop from ACR as Adobe RGB, and the colour space in Photoshop is already set to Adobe RGB. Then when I save them as psd nothing is changed as far as I know. So I'm not sure why there should be a problem with those files..
There shouldn't be...but you've stated previously that your color settings were RGB Color Management OFF and no warnings for Profile Mismatches, Ask when Pasting not Missing Profiles. Which as has been stated is wrong...
So, again, I suggest you adopt "North American Prepress 2" as your color settings.
The fact is, without knowing EXACTLY how your color settings are set up and EXACLTY how you are dealing with files upon open, I'm afraid you are simply doomed to have a color management mess on your hands...
-
marc,
Just to simply confirm that your monitor profile is OK.
When assigning sRGB to the first linked sRGB PDI test image, does it match closely to the preview in Internet Exporer?
If so, then your profile is OK.
-
Jonathan, I'm a little confused, and not sure I made myself clear. But when I open the index file that was attached in this thread, the only way to make it look properly saturated is to choose option one when I open it and get the missing profile warning - 'don't colour manage' or option two - 'Assign working RGB - Adobe RGB'. If I pick 'assign profile sRGB' it opens as flat and desaturated whether I tick 'and then convert to working RGB' or not. So the third option is no good. Since it's an sRGB image I thought it should be opened as sRGB?
edit - properly saturated relatively to what it looks like in internet explorer and similar programs given that I don't know what the index file is supposed to look like.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71891\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
marc, that is EXACTLY what we all do.
when the opened image has a different color space than PS's color space, we use that image's color space as a working space, therefore, avoiding conversion and altering image's pixels' values, which means you keep the image's information untouched.
and because you use the image's color space as working space, the image's colors look normal as what it is, no over or under saturated.
all in all, no offense but i think you dont clearly and fully understand the color management workflow, which was the reason i suggested you to find and read digitaldog's books.
now here's the deal: if, after you have read that book, and it still dont solve your problem, you can cut my head off my shoulder.
-
now here's the deal: if, after you have read that book, and it still dont solve your problem, you can cut my head off my shoulder.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=71925\")
Ooooh. . .gonna sell tickets?
I agree with Phuong (although my offer if it doesn't work, I'll buy you a beer is less bloody) and think your previous settings have kinda goofed you up and you're still trying to recover from it.
In the meantime while Amazon shipps your Color Management for Photographers book, you might try some of the PDF's posted on Adobe at: [a href=\"http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/ps_pro_primers.html]Adobe digital photography white papers and primers[/url]-particularly the one by Bruce Fraser and I titled "A Color Managed Raw Workflow".
-
Having been playing at this digital stuff for only about two and a half years, I can still remember when I first began to realize that "color management" was a big and complicated deal. I'm still struggling from time to time, but folks like Andrew, Bruce, Jeff, and a few others really do make it all make sense (at least some of the time .)
So yes: Do get Andrew's book, and read Jeff and Bruce's papers (several times if necessary.)
My heartiest thanks to all the gurus who take the time and trouble to explain this stuff to us mortals!
Eric
-
Jonathan, I'm a little confused, and not sure I made myself clear. But when I open the index file that was attached in this thread, the only way to make it look properly saturated is to choose option one when I open it and get the missing profile warning - 'don't colour manage' or option two - 'Assign working RGB - Adobe RGB'. If I pick 'assign profile sRGB' it opens as flat and desaturated whether I tick 'and then convert to working RGB' or not. So the third option is no good. Since it's an sRGB image I thought it should be opened as sRGB?
edit - properly saturated relatively to what it looks like in internet explorer and similar programs given that I don't know what the index file is supposed to look like.
"relatively to what it looks like in internet explorer" is a foundation based on quicksand; the relationship between what an image looks like in Photoshop and IE will vary greatly from machine to machine, depending on variations in each machine's monitor. It's sort of like comparing your reflection in the bathroom mirror to what you see in a carnival fun-house mirror--the fun-house reflection is going to be distorted and different, but that doesn't make the bathroom mirror's image any less valid. Non-color-managed applications (and even color managed apps without accurate profiles and proper configuration) are basically fun-house mirrors displaying your photos; they just distort colors and tonality instead of spatial relationships.
-
Just a thought, if you are viewing your image in Explorer with your calibrated monitor, how does it look on another system that is not calibrated?
Eric wrote:
So yes: Do get Andrew's book, and read Jeff and Bruce's papers (several times if necessary.)
My heartiest thanks to all the gurus who take the time and trouble to explain this stuff to us mortals!
Amen to that!
-
marc,
Just to simply confirm that your monitor profile is OK.
When assigning sRGB to the first linked sRGB PDI test image, does it match closely to the preview in Internet Exporer?
If so, then your profile is OK.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71910\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, no.. if I open it I'm asked whether to 'leave as is - don't colour manage', assign adobe rgb, or assign other profile (srgb). If I assign sRGB I get a less saturated image than the one that shows in IE.
-
I'm not sure what more to say, I get confused by the posts here because they seem to contradict each other somewhat, and everything I've tried so far has not changed my main problem.
Since jani had different results than me I'm going to posts some tests on the web and view from another computer to see what it looks like. If I find anything interesting I'll let you know.
-
Pretend this thread never happened. Buy the book mentioned before. Read it. Implement. If you still have issues open a new thread.
-
I'm not sure what more to say, I get confused by the posts here because they seem to contradict each other somewhat, and everything I've tried so far has not changed my main problem.
No actually, pretty much everybody has been in agreement...your previous approach to color management was flawed...you -STILL- haven't answered the basic question of WHY you changed your color settings to No Color Manament and turned off all the warnings. This is fundimentally where you went wrong. What you did with your settings was a pretty big mistake and has led you down the road to basically loosing control over your color management.
You still haven't stated whether or not you've changed your color settings and to what you've changed them to, so we're really all guessing what your problem is.
-
No actually, pretty much everybody has been in agreement...your previous approach to color management was flawed...you -STILL- haven't answered the basic question of WHY you changed your color settings to No Color Manament and turned off all the warnings. This is fundimentally where you went wrong. What you did with your settings was a pretty big mistake and has led you down the road to basically loosing control over your color management.
You still haven't stated whether or not you've changed your color settings and to what you've changed them to, so we're really all guessing what your problem is.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is not true. I didn't say why the settings were changed because I don't know why they were changed. I don't see how it's important that they were changed because:
I changed them to what has been recommended here. I have stated that multiple times. I have followed everything step-by-step as some people have kindly instructed me to do. I have used fresh raw files after having changed everything as recommended.
In other words, whatever happened in the past is completely irrelevant. And yet, the problem is exactly the same as it was before I started this thread.
Dark Penguin. Yeah, I agree. Except I already have digital dog's book and have not found any answers in it so far that helps me.
I'll do some testing with other computers and see what happens though. Everyone who has tried to help, thank you.